GET DAILY SIGNALSFLLA vs ILF: Comparing Two Key Latin America ETF Options
Key Takeaways
- FLLA tracks the FTSE Latin America RIC Capped Index across roughly 140 large- and mid-cap stocks, while ILF tracks the S&P Latin America 40 Index of just 40 of the region's largest equities, making ILF a more concentrated, mega-cap-heavy vehicle.
- Cost structure diverges sharply: FLLA charges a 0.19% expense ratio versus 0.47% for ILF, a meaningful structural advantage for long-term holders.
- Both funds are heavily weighted to Brazil, Mexico, financials, and materials, but ILF adds exposure to high-growth fintech and Peru-based names not prominent in FLLA's broader roster.
- Liquidity and scale strongly favor ILF, which holds several billion dollars in assets and trades with tighter bid/ask spreads than the comparatively small FLLA.
- Tickeron AI Verdict: ILF is favored based on superior liquidity, institutional scale, tighter trading spreads, and exposure to higher-momentum holdings, despite FLLA's lower cost and broader diversification.
Why These ETFs Stand Out for Regional Exposure
For investors looking for a single-ticket way to access Latin American equities, the Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF (FLLA) and the iShares Latin America 40 ETF (ILF) rank among the more established choices. Both are passive index trackers offering exposure to Brazil, Mexico, Chile, and other markets in the region, with heavy allocations to financials and materials. They follow different benchmarks, however, and vary in number of holdings, fees, liquidity, and concentration levels. This comparison looks at those differences along with sector weights and positioning to help clarify which fund might better suit a given allocation to Latin America.
Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF (FLLA) at a Glance
FLLA aims to match the FTSE Latin America RIC Capped Index, which covers large- and mid-cap stocks on a free-float, market-cap-weighted basis with quarterly caps on individual issuers. The fund began trading in October 2018 and generally holds around 140 securities, providing wider coverage than its 40-stock counterpart. Leading positions include Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. (Petrobras), Itaú Unibanco Holding, Vale, Grupo México, and Grupo Financiero Banorte. Financial services account for about 26% of assets, followed by materials, energy, industrials, and consumer staples. Brazil makes up roughly half the portfolio, Mexico near 28%, and Chile about 8%. The expense ratio stands at 0.19%, with semi-annual index reconstitutions and distributions. I also checked this using Tickeron’s AI Screener to see how the stock compares to others in the industry.
iShares Latin America 40 ETF (ILF) at a Glance
ILF follows the S&P Latin America 40 Index, which selects 40 of the largest and most liquid equities across five regional exchanges. Launched in October 2001, it is one of the older dedicated Latin America funds and is managed by BlackRock Fund Advisors. While the index targets 40 names, the actual holdings can include a few additional share classes or cash positions. Top holdings feature Nu Holdings, Vale, Itaú Unibanco Holding, Grupo México, and Petrobras. Financials represent a larger slice at around 35%, followed by materials and energy. Country weights center on Brazil (about 47%) and Mexico (about 23%), with added exposure to Chile, Peru, and Cayman Islands-domiciled Nu Holdings. The expense ratio is 0.47%, and the fund is classified as non-diversified given its concentrated mega-cap focus. From what I see, ILF’s profile tends to emphasize higher-momentum names.
Market Forces Shaping Both Funds
The same macroeconomic drivers influence both ETFs. Commodity prices matter a great deal because of heavy exposure to energy, mining, and materials companies such as Petrobras, Vale, and Grupo México. Interest-rate cycles also play a key role, as financials dominate the portfolios and banks like Itaú Unibanco and Banorte respond directly to local monetary policy, credit growth, and currency moves. Brazil’s fiscal path and Mexico’s nearshoring trends have served as ongoing catalysts, while political and regulatory shifts add periodic risk. U.S. dollar strength and changes in global risk appetite further affect returns, since local-currency performance converts back to dollars for U.S. investors.
Performance Patterns and Relative Positioning
Over recent cycles the two funds have generally moved together, driven by shared Brazilian, financial, and commodity exposures. ILF’s concentrated mega-cap approach can magnify moves in its largest positions, including the high-growth fintech Nu Holdings, which has contributed to performance in ways not matched at the same scale in FLLA. FLLA’s broader set of roughly 140 holdings and capping rules have delivered somewhat smoother results with less dependence on single names, while its 0.19% fee helps with tighter index tracking over longer periods. On a positioning basis, ILF’s larger asset base and narrower bid/ask spreads support more efficient trading, whereas FLLA’s cost edge may suit buy-and-hold investors who accept lower trading volume. I also checked this using Tickeron’s AI Screener to compare their holdings and trends.
Using Tickeron’s AI Tools for ETF Comparisons
When evaluating funds like these, I often run a quick screen with Tickeron’s AI Screener to filter on technical patterns, fundamentals, and performance metrics across emerging-market ETFs. It helps surface relative strengths in liquidity, sector weights, and momentum without manually sorting through dozens of holdings. This approach has become a regular part of my process for narrowing regional allocation choices.
Disclaimer
The information on this webpage is provided for general informational and educational purposes only and is not intended as investment advice, a recommendation to purchase or sell any security, or an offer or solicitation related to investments. It does not consider your personal financial situation, goals, or risk profile, and all investing carries inherent risks, including the possibility of losing your entire investment. For more details, please review our full disclaimer.
Contributor
Financial analyst and market blogger with expertise in equity research, fundamental analysis, and macroeconomic trends. I regularly publish coverage on individual stocks, ETFs, and sector developments — combining rigorous financial analysis with clear, engaging writing for a broad investment audience.
ILF's RSI Oscillator recovers from oversold territory
The RSI Indicator for ILF moved out of oversold territory on November 06, 2026. This could be a sign that the stock is shifting from a downward trend to an upward trend. Traders may want to buy the stock or call options. The A.I.dvisor looked at 25 similar instances when the indicator left oversold territory. In 24 of the 25 cases the stock moved higher. This puts the odds of a move higher at 90%.
Technical Analysis (Indicators)
Bullish Trend Analysis
The Stochastic Oscillator shows that the ticker has stayed in the oversold zone for 7 days. The price of this ticker is presumed to bounce back soon, since the longer the ticker stays in the oversold zone, the more promptly an upward trend is expected.
Following a +1.87% 3-day Advance, the price is estimated to grow further. Considering data from situations where ILF advanced for three days, in 294 of 333 cases, the price rose further within the following month. The odds of a continued upward trend are 88%.
ILF may jump back above the lower band and head toward the middle band. Traders may consider buying the stock or exploring call options.
Bearish Trend Analysis
The Momentum Indicator moved below the 0 level on October 22, 2026. You may want to consider selling the stock, shorting the stock, or exploring put options on ILF as a result. In 66 of 81 cases where the Momentum Indicator fell below 0, the stock fell further within the subsequent month. The odds of a continued downward trend are 81%.
The Moving Average Convergence Divergence Histogram (MACD) for ILF turned negative on October 22, 2026. This could be a sign that the stock is set to turn lower in the coming weeks. Traders may want to sell the stock or buy put options. Tickeron's A.I.dvisor looked at 44 similar instances when the indicator turned negative. In 37 of the 44 cases the stock turned lower in the days that followed. This puts the odds of success at 84%.
ILF moved below its 50-day moving average on October 26, 2026 date and that indicates a change from an upward trend to a downward trend.
The 10-day moving average for ILF crossed bearishly below the 50-day moving average on October 30, 2026. This indicates that the trend has shifted lower and could be considered a sell signal. In 18 of 21 past instances when the 10-day crossed below the 50-day, the stock continued to move higher over the following month. The odds of a continued downward trend are 86%.
Following a 3-day decline, the stock is projected to fall further. Considering past instances where ILF declined for three days, the price rose further in 50 of 62 cases within the following month. The odds of a continued downward trend are 84%.
Notable companies
Industry description
Market Cap
High and low price notable news
Volume
Fundamental Analysis Ratings
The average fundamental analysis ratings, where 1 is best and 100 is worst, are as follows
Advertisement
General Information
Category Unknown